I noticed in the Forgotten Realms Style Guide a change in the Calendar of Harptos comparison to our real world calendar: in previous editions (AD&D 2nd), Hammer was January. In the FRSG, Hammer is compared to December.

Is it a mistake or is it a reflection of the season changes from the Second Sundering that SCAG mentioned?

gods, with all the things that we have to keep up with in regards to this game... seriously, why f*** with this? I'm hoping its a mistake and not someone making a change just to make a change, because otherwise that's just entirely frivolous BS. There is so much more that can be done to make the world better.

The Style Guide reflects an in-house decision at WotC to align the winter and summer equinoxes (which are called "Midwinter" and "Midsummer" in our world) with the Midwinter and Midsummer celebrations in-world. I vocally opposed this decision, but refused to make it the hill on which I'd die, which is why the text about the seasons possibly/probably falling back to their previous cycle follows (SCAG, 15).

Basically, the shift of the winter equinox went from Nightal 20 to Hammer 31/Alturiak 0, which is a shift of 40 days. The same for the summer equinox. This would have wrought unholy havoc on crop cycles, and if it becomes a permanent change, will just result in the migration of the annual festivals—which don't care one little bit about the synchronicity of Faerûnian and Earth Midwinter, but absolutely wouldn't keep celebrating a holiday like Greengrass on a date when it's unlikely that there is any actual green grass.

(Greengrass is a spring festival roughly equivalent to Beltane/May Day, and to hold it on the equivalent of 20 or 21 March doesn't make any sense.)

Which reminds me to get back to my Calendar of Harptos product, when I get the chance...

The Style Guide reflects an in-house decision at WotC to align the winter and summer equinoxes (which are called "Midwinter" and "Midsummer" in our world) with the Midwinter and Midsummer celebrations in-world. I vocally opposed this decision, but refused to make it the hill on which I'd die, which is why the text about the seasons possibly/probably falling back to their previous cycle follows (SCAG, 15).

Basically, the shift of the winter equinox went from Nightal 20 to Hammer 31/Alturiak 0, which is a shift of 40 days. The same for the summer equinox. This would have wrought unholy havoc on crop cycles, and if it becomes a permanent change, will just result in the migration of the annual festivals—which don't care one little bit about the synchronicity of Faerûnian and Earth Midwinter, but absolutely wouldn't keep celebrating a holiday like Greengrass on a date when it's unlikely that there is any actual green grass.

(Greengrass is a spring festival roughly equivalent to Beltane/May Day, and to hold it on the equivalent of 20 or 21 March doesn't make any sense.)

Which reminds me to get back to my Calendar of Harptos product, when I get the chance...

Yeah, it wouldn't be a hill I'd die over either. I'd just roll my eyes and go "really" and make it abundantly clear that there's a lot more interesting stuff to worry about. Then I'd probably spend the rest of the day belittling all their ideas with snide remarks about changing the months.

In fact, in 3e, they said "The months of Faerun roughly correspond to the months of the Gregorian calendar." 1st and 2nd edition specifically compared Hammer to January. So, changing it is basically changing for change sake.

Wait, so what does this mean for the starting and ending months for major events? For instance, the Spellplague struck on Tarsakh 29 in 1385 DR, so in universe, does that mean that by this new reckoning, the Spellplague started in Ches instead? Or is it a global retcon and declaring that this new reckoning is how it's always been?

I think it means the same thing it has always meant, they don't care about continuity, what matters is what they have written right now.

If tomorrow they write that Tiamat has never existed in the realms then that's all that matters, not how it affects previous or even current editions or how it affects the in world history. Canon now is a constantly reinvented cycle of kewl ideas.

Wait, so what does this mean for the starting and ending months for major events? For instance, the Spellplague struck on Tarsakh 29 in 1385 DR, so in universe, does that mean that by this new reckoning, the Spellplague started in Ches instead? Or is it a global retcon and declaring that this new reckoning is how it's always been?

The equivalence to our Gregorian months has nothing to do with the actual tracking of time. It's about the rough equivalence in terms of climate, weather, crop patterns, etc.

quote:Originally posted by Garen ThalThe equivalence to our Gregorian months has nothing to do with the actual tracking of time. It's about the rough equivalence in terms of climate, weather, crop patterns, etc.

Sorry, I should've been more clear. My question was more along the lines of, is the Gregorian equivalence the only thing that's changed? In universe, the calendar is the same as its always been, rather than having been re-figured to adapt to changes in climate, weather, crop patterns, etc, post-Sundering?

Btw, this document doesn't have WotC's official approval; nothing on the DMGuild page said that it was officially published by WotC, and it has now been pulled off. I'm told that the matter at hand doesn't even appear in the official WotC books. In Dragon Heist, for example the calendar is unchanged.

As for the gods list, in that document, they said that the 4e list includes the ones active at the beginning of the Sundering, but that's not 5e; when 5e kicks in, the Sundering has already ended, and the 4e list is outdated (the lists in SCAG, MToF and PHB combined describe the current state of things).

Also, assuming that the document is true, it was meant to guide AL writers, and AL isn't canon, so it would have 0 effect on the Realms anyway. Nothing to be alarmed for.

As for the gods list, in that document, they said that the 4e list includes the ones active at the beginning of the Sundering, but that's not 5e; when 5e kicks in, the Sundering has already ended, and the 4e list is outdated (the lists in SCAG, MToF and PHB combined describe the current state of things).

I guess I should have said "legal" instead of "canon", as in still usable for DM's Guild products and AL adventures (and so, for canon friendly home campaigns), even if they aren't used in actual WotC products. I still like the fact that they allow the gods of that list to be potentially active in the current Realms.

And I know that nothing in DM's Guild and the AL adventures is canon unless they say otherwise (and that even applies to the Adepts program, that's supposed to be the WotC endorsed products).

Anyways, I noticed how they are bashing at the Forgotten Realms Wiki. It's not the first time they do this, but is curious that they are doing it in a supposedly friendly community such at DM's Guild.

Long ago, in the distant past, they fell into decay. The philosopher’s path... The river of glory... Even the saints resting in the darkness rise up without response and block the way...

Yeah, I didn't like that part either. The FRWiki isn't always precise or complete, and some pages are outdated, but it gives people the kind of comprehensive view of the Realms and their history that WotC themselves are refusing to write for 5e. That, or they're pissed that it's easier to just get the info you need online rather than buying their books.

quote:Your main references for our worlds, such as the Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance, should be guides that we provide or official products published for the fifth edition of the D&D roleplaying game.Don’t rely on Internet searches to give you the right answer to questions about a D&D setting. The Internet contains contradictions, misinterpretations, and outright fabrications. Both Wikipedia and the Forgotten Realms Wiki, for instance, contain some unreliable information.

Wikipedia certainly can be unreliable, and I know that I have found incorrect info on the FR wiki. I corrected it, but that doesn't change the fact that it was there.

Unless every single entry was written and approved only by WotC staff, it's inevitable that at some point, bad info will be written into the wiki. It doesn't have to be malicious -- one example that I fixed was simply a bad misreading of the source material.

And actually, even if it was all written and approved by WotC, there would still be mistakes -- they've not always kept their info straight from sourcebook to sourcebook within a single edition.

With how easy it is to enter incorrect info, either because of a simple mistake or missing a particular source out of the hundreds of books, comics, and gamebooks available, I would say that ANY wiki -- even an in-house, internal-to-WotC-only one! -- would have the potential to be unreliable.

So I don't see that there was a bash, here. Especially since it just says "trust official canon before anything else."

I get that there's a lot of time and energy put into the Forgotten Realms wiki, and I do like it, myself... But it's a wiki, so by its very nature, mistakes can be made.

You make a good point there, Wooly, I may have seen that statement as hostile words, but rereading it, it's more in line with what you said. That's even more true given how 5e retconned or changed many things, and WotC obviously want the AL writers to stay in line with their new lore.

I guess is the way they said it. You put it in a positive, undestandable way. The editors of the wiki are human, they can make mistakes. And they aren't privy to the whole body of Realmslore.

This is different than saying "those sources are wrong, unreliable and even fabricate stuff, don't use them!". Or that is how I read it (bear in mind that I have to translate this, maybe the politeness got lost in translation).

And even so, Ed sometimes references the wiki. So, it can't be that wrong, really.

Long ago, in the distant past, they fell into decay. The philosopher’s path... The river of glory... Even the saints resting in the darkness rise up without response and block the way...